In MUR 5103, the complaint alleged that fraudulent
facsimile transmissions and telephone calls were made to the residents
and businesses of the First Congressional District of Arizona attacking
Susan Bitter Smith, a congressional candidate, and using her name
to attack another candidate, Jeff Flake, between August 6, 2000
and the Arizona primary election on September 12, 2000 . The faxes
and telephone calls did not include disclaimers. The respondents
named in this report were subsequently notified accordingly.

Based upon the responses received from the respondents,
the Commission found reason to believe that Anthony “Todd” Banasack
violated the law by failing to include a disclaimer in the communications.
Considering the minimal costs and resources associated with the faxes,
the lack of evidence of involvement of a federal candidate or committee,
and the level of additional resources that would be required to continue
pursuing this respondent, the Commission decided to take no further
action against Mr. Banasack. The Commission found no reason to believe
against the other respondents and closed the file.

DOCUMENTS ON PUBLIC RECORD:

Documents from these matters are available from the
Commission's web site at http://eqs.sdrdc.com/eqs/searcheqs by entering
5103 under case number. They are also available in the FECs Public
Records Office at 999 E St. NW in Washington.

The commission determined that the Minnesota DFL House
Caucus committee violated the Act by failing to timely file disclosure
reports in 2002. The Caucus also violated the law by receiving an
excessive contribution from one contributor in 2002. Finally, the
Caucus violated the Act by making a series of impermissible transfers
from its non-federal account to its federal account. The Commission
found no reason to believe that the Caucus and the Party violated
the Act with regard to transfers between the two committees. The Commission
found reason to believe the Party committee violated the Act by receiving
excessive contributions but decided to take no further action and
send an admonishment letter. The Commission found reason to believe
against two individuals for making excessive contributions but decided
to take no further action and send admonishment letters.

DOCUMENTS ON PUBLIC RECORD:

Documents from these matters are available from the Commission's
web site at http://eqs.sdrdc.com/eqs/searcheqs by entering 5349
under case number. They are also available in the FECs Public Records
Office at 999 E St. NW in Washington.

Use of non-federal (state) funds for a federal election; candidate
loan from other than personal funds

DISPOSITION:

(a-b) No reason to believe*

[re: use of non-federal (state) funds for a federal
election; candidate loan from other than personal funds]

In MUR 5416, the complaint alleged that Wayne Christian,
a candidate for Congress in 2004, or his principal campaign committee
improperly used funds and assets from Christian's state campaign committee
and his state office account to benefit his federal race. In addition
the complaint alleged that Christian made an improper loan to the
Committee. The Commission found no reason to believe Wayne Christian
or his principal campaign committee violated the law by using non-federal
(state) funds for his federal election or made an improper loan to
the campaign committee.

DOCUMENTS ON PUBLIC RECORD:

Documents from these matters are available from the Commission's
web site at http://eqs.sdrdc.com/eqs/searcheqs by entering under
case number. They are also available in the FECs Public Records
Office at 999 E St. NW in Washington.

*There are four administrative stages to the FEC enforcement process:

1. Receipt of proper complaint

3. "Probable cause" stage

2. "Reason to believe" stage

4. Conciliation stage

It requires the votes of at least four of the six Commissioners
to take any action. The FEC can close a case at any point after reviewing
a complaint. If a violation is found and conciliation cannot be reached,
then the FEC can institute a civil court action against a respondent.